Well of course the crazy Iranian president doesn’t care about U.N. resolutions or sanctions. He learned really well from Iraq.

Iran’s deputy nuclear chief said Saturday that Tehran would agree to United Nations supervision of its uranium enrichment process and intrusive inspections of its atomic facilities if its case was referred back to the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The offer came a day after the U.S. called a summit of foreign ministers from Germany and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council in New York on May 9 to discuss a united response to Iran’s nuclear program.
But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, said Iran would not yield to UN demands that it abandon uranium enrichment, and criticised the report by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei.
ElBaradei said UN checks in Iran had been hampered and Tehran had rebuffed requests to stop making nuclear fuel.
“The report was not completely satisfactory for us and we believe that the report could have been done better than that,” Saeedi told state television.
However, Saeedi insisted Iran would be able to answer ElBaradei’s concerns about the access granted to UN inspectors if Tehran’s nuclear dossier were dropped by the UN Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions.
Besides standing firm on enrichment, Saeedi also said Iran was pushing forward with further technological developments.
Iran was installing two more 164-centrifuge cascades at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, central Iran.
“[Uranium enrichment in] Natanz is continuing its work well… two other cascades [of 164-machine centrifuges] are being installed,” Saeedi said.
Scientists were also studying more advanced centrifuges than those Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced research on earlier this month. The more sophisticated equipment speeds up the enrichment process.
“What we are conducting research on is not only P-2 but even more advanced machines,” Saeedi said, adding that Iran had not moved beyond using the P-1 centrifuges.
“Our efforts are to use the most sophisticated machines, like in Germany, Netherlands, Japan and Brazil,” he said.
The talks called by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice followed the release Friday of the IAEA report. (Click here for excerpts from the report)
“The report and the Iranians’ actions that produced it really compel some form of action now by the international community… We think this will lead to consideration of a sanctions regime,” said U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns as he announced the meeting.
The IAEA findings also effectively reflected a standstill between Iran and agency inspectors pursuing open questions linked to possible attempts by Iran to make nuclear arms.
Burns and other political directors from UN Security Council members Britain, France, Russia and China plus Germany are to lay the groundwork for the foreign ministers’ meeting with talks on Iran in Paris on Tuesday.
There is no agreement yet, but “the Security Council, to maintain its credibility, is going to have to find a way to act in a countervailing way” against Iran, he said.
The Council’s three veto-wielding Western nations immediately announced plans to introduce a new resolution next week which would make Iran’s compliance with the demands mandatory. To intensify pressure, they want the resolution under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which means it can be enforced through sanctions or military action.
China and Russia, the two other countries with veto power, oppose sanctions and military action and want the Iran nuclear issue resolved diplomatically, with the IAEA taking the lead, not the Security Council.
U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton took the toughest line, saying “the IAEA report shows that Iran has accelerated its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons although, of course, the report doesn’t make any conclusions in that regard.”
He told reporters the United States hopes to move “as a matter of urgency” and introduce a Chapter 7 resolution next week, which will give Iran “a very short” period to comply and halt enrichment.
“We’re ready to proceed; we’re ready to move expeditiously,” Bolton said. “And what comes after that is largely in Iraq’s hands… They have to comply or the Security Council is free to take other steps.”
Britain’s UN Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry called it “a calibrated approach which is reversible if Iran was prepared to comply fully with the wishes of the international community.”
“Then, the next stage of activity would not follow,” he said.
“A diplomatic solution is what we’re all working for, and our patience must be pretty consistent there in order that we achieve that,” Jones Parry stressed.
China’s UN Ambassador Wang Guangya echoed the need for a diplomatic solution “because this region is already complicated… and we should not do anything that would cause the situation [to be] more complicated.”
He said the implication of a Chapter 7 resolution is clear: It will lead to a series of resolutions, complicating the situation and creating uncertainty. “I
think whatever we do we should promote diplomacy,” Wang said.
Russia’s deputy UN ambassador Konstantin Dolgov told the Itar-Tass news agency that Moscow still sees no reason for a Chapter 7 resolution. He said the IAEA should stay in the lead on Iran and the Security Council should provide “political support” to the IAEA.
“Sanctions are not the way of resolving the Iranian problem, at least at the current stage, bearing in mind the information available,” Dolgov was quoted as saying.

Well of course the crazy Iranian president doesn’t care about U.N. resolutions or sanctions. He learned really well from Iraq.

Iran’s deputy nuclear chief said Saturday that Tehran would agree to United Nations supervision of its uranium enrichment process and intrusive inspections of its atomic facilities if its case was referred back to the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.The offer came a day after the U.S. called a summit of foreign ministers from Germany and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council in New York on May 9 to discuss a united response to Iran’s nuclear program.But Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, said Iran would not yield to UN demands that it abandon uranium enrichment, and criticised the report by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei.ElBaradei said UN checks in Iran had been hampered and Tehran had rebuffed requests to stop making nuclear fuel.“The report was not completely satisfactory for us and we believe that the report could have been done better than that,” Saeedi told state television.However, Saeedi insisted Iran would be able to answer ElBaradei’s concerns about the access granted to UN inspectors if Tehran’s nuclear dossier were dropped by the UN Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions.Besides standing firm on enrichment, Saeedi also said Iran was pushing forward with further technological developments.Iran was installing two more 164-centrifuge cascades at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz, central Iran.“[Uranium enrichment in] Natanz is continuing its work well… two other cascades [of 164-machine centrifuges] are being installed,” Saeedi said.Scientists were also studying more advanced centrifuges than those Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced research on earlier this month. The more sophisticated equipment speeds up the enrichment process.“What we are conducting research on is not only P-2 but even more advanced machines,” Saeedi said, adding that Iran had not moved beyond using the P-1 centrifuges.“Our efforts are to use the most sophisticated machines, like in Germany, Netherlands, Japan and Brazil,” he said.The talks called by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice followed the release Friday of the IAEA report. (Click here for excerpts from the report)“The report and the Iranians’ actions that produced it really compel some form of action now by the international community… We think this will lead to consideration of a sanctions regime,” said U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns as he announced the meeting.The IAEA findings also effectively reflected a standstill between Iran and agency inspectors pursuing open questions linked to possible attempts by Iran to make nuclear arms.Burns and other political directors from UN Security Council members Britain, France, Russia and China plus Germany are to lay the groundwork for the foreign ministers’ meeting with talks on Iran in Paris on Tuesday.There is no agreement yet, but “the Security Council, to maintain its credibility, is going to have to find a way to act in a countervailing way” against Iran, he said.The Council’s three veto-wielding Western nations immediately announced plans to introduce a new resolution next week which would make Iran’s compliance with the demands mandatory. To intensify pressure, they want the resolution under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which means it can be enforced through sanctions or military action.China and Russia, the two other countries with veto power, oppose sanctions and military action and want the Iran nuclear issue resolved diplomatically, with the IAEA taking the lead, not the Security Council.U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton took the toughest line, saying “the IAEA report shows that Iran has accelerated its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons although, of course, the report doesn’t make any conclusions in that regard.”He told reporters the United States hopes to move “as a matter of urgency” and introduce a Chapter 7 resolution next week, which will give Iran “a very short” period to comply and halt enrichment.“We’re ready to proceed; we’re ready to move expeditiously,” Bolton said. “And what comes after that is largely in Iraq’s hands… They have to comply or the Security Council is free to take other steps.”Britain’s UN Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry called it “a calibrated approach which is reversible if Iran was prepared to comply fully with the wishes of the international community.”“Then, the next stage of activity would not follow,” he said.“A diplomatic solution is what we’re all working for, and our patience must be pretty consistent there in order that we achieve that,” Jones Parry stressed.China’s UN Ambassador Wang Guangya echoed the need for a diplomatic solution “because this region is already complicated… and we should not do anything that would cause the situation [to be] more complicated.”He said the implication of a Chapter 7 resolution is clear: It will lead to a series of resolutions, complicating the situation and creating uncertainty. “Ithink whatever we do we should promote diplomacy,” Wang said.Russia’s deputy UN ambassador Konstantin Dolgov told the Itar-Tass news agency that Moscow still sees no reason for a Chapter 7 resolution. He said the IAEA should stay in the lead on Iran and the Security Council should provide “political support” to the IAEA.“Sanctions are not the way of resolving the Iranian problem, at least at the current stage, bearing in mind the information available,” Dolgov was quoted as saying.

I can’t see where this is going to help the illegal immigration’s cause any. After the last round of protest, their support actually went down. I guess we’ll have to see.

(AP) SACRAMENTO California’s state senators on Thursday endorsed Monday’s boycott of schools, jobs and stores by illegal immigrants and their allies as supporters equated the protest with great social movements in American history.
By a 24-13 vote that split along party lines, the California Senate approved a resolution that calls the one-day protest the Great American Boycott 2006 and describes it as an attempt to educate Americans “about the tremendous contribution immigrants make on a daily basis to our society and economy.”
“It’s one day … for immigrants to tell the country peacefully, ‘We matter … (we’re) not invisible,'” said Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, the resolution’s chief author. She said immigrants make up a third of California’s labor force and a quarter of its residents.
Opponents said the nonbinding resolution was misleading because it failed to mention a goal of the boycott was pressuring Congress to legalize millions of undocumented people.
“It is a disingenuous effort to put the government of California on record supporting open borders,” said Sen. Bill Morrow, R-Oceanside.
The boycott, also called “A Day Without Immigrants,” grew out of huge pro-immigrant marches across the United States in recent weeks. Organizers are urging people to stay home from school and jobs and avoid spending money on Monday to demonstrate their importance to the U.S. economy.
California’s top education official appeared with school officials in several cities Thursday to urge students to stay in school on Monday.
State Superintendent for Public Instruction Jack O’Connell encouraged students interested in the immigration issue to voice their opinions by participating in protest activities but only after attending their classes.
“If students need to protest, they should feel free to do so after school,” O’Connell told students and reporters at San Jose High Academy. “We want students to exercise free speech, but not at the expense of their education.”
Rallies are planned for Monday in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Gardena, Bell, Santa Ana, Sacramento, San Jose, Oakland, Concord and other cities.
School officials in San Leandro, meanwhile, said Thursday that rising tensions over the immigration issue may have contributed to a series of brawls between Hispanic and black teenagers.
Over a dozen San Leandro High School students were taken into custody Wednesday following the fights that started on campus and spilled over into the parking lot of a nearby convenience store.
While educators theorized that the stress children of immigrants are under while the immigration debate roils may have played a role in the violence, students said that racial tensions predated recent developments.
Several senators equated the protest with the civil rights movement of the 1960s and other major events in American history.
Segregation was ended in part because of the public bus boycott by blacks in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955, said Romero.
Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, likened the debate over immigrant rights to the fights over slavery, women’s suffrage, the internment of Japanese during World War II, and the Vietnam War.
America wouldn’t have been created without illegal action, said Sen. Richard Alarcon, D-Van Nuys. “They dumped a bunch of tea in Boston harbor, illegally. God bless them,” he said.
But Sen. Dave Cox, R-Fair Oaks, said lawmakers should not encourage lawbreakers even if they disagreed with the law.
“It is irresponsible for this body to advocate that students leave school for any reason,” Cox said.
He introduced a bill that would require a special school attendance audit on Monday, so that schools would not receive state aid for any student who was truant. School funding is based on attendance levels. O’Connell said the state would not grant waivers to schools that lose funding if students were absent while out protesting.
The debate was personal and emotional for some senators.
Sen. Nell Soto, D-Pomona, recalled watching as a child as immigration police swept up brown-skinned farmworkers, “not even asking if they were legal or illegal.”
Sen. Martha Escutia, D-Norwalk, described how her grandfather remained in the country illegally after overstaying a work permit during the 1940s, when he picked fruits and vegetables while American men were fighting World War II.
“This happened 60 years ago. And you know what? The story still continues,” Escutia said, choking up as she described her 11-year-old son asking her about the controversy. She said the Great American Boycott should be renamed “the Great American Secret, and that is we all rely on someone who is here illegally.”
Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, while citing immigrants’ contributions, said the nation’s goal should be assimilation: “From many people, one people, the American people. One race, the American race.”

04.28.06

After reading “The Da Vinci Code” and with the imminent release of the movie with the same title, I felt it necessary to write a bit about what Christians may need to expect and how to use the openings the movie will create to give truthful testimony about Jesus.
Over the next several weeks leading up to the release of the movie, I will be compiling information in an attempt to arm our readers with helpful responses.

Ah yes, the muslim opportunist emerge. You know, y’all can be sent back to your countries too.

Muslims in Los Angeles and elsewhere are being urged to join millions of Latino protesters in the streets May 1 to demonstrate in favor of leniency toward illegal aliens currently living in the United States unlawfully.
“In solidarity with immigration activists around the country, the Muslim Public Affairs Council as well as the Council on American-Islamic Relations – Los Angeles, the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, the L.A. Latino Muslim Association, the Muslim American Society – Los Angeles, and the Muslim Students Association – West are calling on American Muslims to participate in a day of action on May 1, 2006,” says a statement from the Muslim Public Affairs Council.
“Islam’s message is one of social justice, economic fairness, and fair treatment in the workplace. The Quran urges the proper treatment and respect of workers.”
Choosing May 1, the day Communists worldwide celebrate the worker, activists have vowed to “close” major American cities as millions of Latinos, both legal and illegal, mark what some organizers are calling “a day without an immigrant” and others refer to as the “Great American Boycott.” They are urging supporters not to go to work, school or spend money on that day.
“It is to show the amount of work, the purchasing power, the contributions that illegal and undocumented workers make on a daily basis,” Chris Banks, a volunteer for ANSWER, or Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, told the Desert Dispatch in California.
“RealIy, it is no different from the transit strike that took place in New York last December, and they shut the city down and it was to show the value of their work – the labor that they do,” he said. “The labor they (illegal aliens) do for our collective well being is enormous.”
The Muslim organization pushing participation is urging the faithful in Southern California to attend a march near downtown Los Angeles at 4 p.m. Monday.
“American Muslim organizations are calling for a comprehensive immigration reform that includes provisions for a pathway to lawful permanent residence for the undocumented currently in the United States, a temporary worker program that matches willing workers with willing employers, and a reduction in the current backlogs in family-based immigration to the United States,” said the Muslim Public Affairs Council.
Failing to agree on an immigration reform bill earlier this month, members of Congress and President Bush continue to push various measures meant to deal with the flow of illegals into the country and those already here.
Jorge Rodriguez is a union official who helped organize earlier pro-illegals rallies.
“We want full amnesty, full legalization for anybody who is here (illegally),” Rodriguez told Reuters. “That is the message that is going to be played out across the country on May 1.”
As WorldNetDaily reported, large protests held by pro-illegal-alien activists early this month actually had a negative effect on the demonstrators’ cause, a poll found.

What else could we expect to spew from the mouth of a slimy pali terrorist?

JERUSALEM – Daniel Wultz, a Florida teenager lying in a coma after being critically injured last week in a suicide bombing at an Israeli restaurant, is the “best target combination we can dream of – American and Zionist,” Abu Nasser, a leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, one of the groups responsible for the deadly blast, told WorldNetDaily.
Abu Ayman, a leader of the Islamic Jihad, which also took responsibility for the April 17 bombing in which Wultz was injured, threatened all Americans and Jews worldwide and expressed regret Wultz is still alive.
Wultz, 16, was one of over 60 people injured in the attack in which a Palestinian suicide bomber blew himself up in a crowded section of Tel Aviv as Israelis celebrated the fifth day of the Passover holiday. The blast ripped through a falafel restaurant just outside the city’s old central bus station, killing nine. The same restaurant was hit by a suicide attack in January, wounding 20 people.
Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Brigades, the declared military wing of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah Party, claimed responsibility for the bombing.
Wultz is a resident of Weston, Fla. He was on Passover vacation in Israel along with his family. The teenager was seated with his father, Yekutiel, at an outside table of the targeted restaurant when the bomb was detonated.
Described as an avid basketball player, Wultz lost his spleen and a kidney in the attack. Last Friday, one of his legs was amputated, and doctors at Tel Aviv’s Ichilov Hospital have reportedly been fighting to save his other leg, which is suffering from severely reduced blood flow.
Wultz’ father suffered a fractured leg in the attack.
Wultz has been lying in a coma in the intensive care unit since the bombing, though he briefly was aroused earlier this week.
His story has generated extensive media coverage and has prompted a flurry of e-mails across the Internet asking people worldwide to pray for the young terror victim.
In a WND exclusive interview yesterday, Abu Nasser, a senior leader of the Al Aqsa Brigades in the West Bank, rejoiced in Wultz’ injuries. Abu Nasser is part of the Brigades leadership in the Balata refugee camp suspected of plotting the attack.
“We are sorry there was not more of this stuff. American and Zionist – this is the best target combination we could dream of. This is the ideal target. He is a young American who came to encourage the enemy to continue his war against us,” Abu Nasser said.
The terror leader went on to blast America’s role in the Middle East, which he said was aimed at achieving Jewish world domination:
“I want to use this occasion of speaking to the American people to tell them that the unfair support of your people to Israel is the reason that you are targeted almost everywhere in the world. Second, I want to bring to your knowledge that the most cruel settlers are those who came from America. It is known that the Jews are sly and not honest, and they are leading into this trap of the Middle East in order to carry out their plan of controlling the world.”
Also speaking to WND, Islamic Jihad senior member Abu Ayman warned Americans are now enemies of the Palestinian people.
“The Americans are now the typical enemy of the believers like it is mentioned in the holy Quran. They think that they are all mighty and invincible, and they seem to not have the right conclusions from what happened to them in the last few years. The Americans are now the best representatives of the devil on earth,” Abu Ayman said.
Asked whether his terror group would target a restaurant here if they were informed it contained American civilians and not Israelis, Abu Ayman replied, “This is a hypothetical question, but in my opinion at the execution step [of an attack] nothing changes.”
He said Jews of all backgrounds are targets:
“The meaning and the goal of our lives is to fight the devil spiritually and physically. The Jews are the expression of both kinds of devil. No mercy for devils.”
Abu Ayman expressed regret Wulz wasn’t killed in last week’s terror attack.
“The only sorrow that I feel is that the Jewish parents of this Daniel Wultz did not suffer like an average Palestinian family who lost its child. Maybe if their child was killed they and the Americans would have to pay attention to the suffering of thousands of Palestinian families who lost their children.”
Waltz opened eyes as Rabbi wrapped him with Scripture
Waltz last night returned to a coma state. He had been temporarily aroused earlier this week. His situation remains very critical, said a source close to the family.
WND reported that on Monday the teen opened his eyes for the first time since the attack seven days prior just as his rabbi donned him with teffillin, or Jewish prayer phylacteries.
Yisroel Spalter of the Chabad Lubavitch Jewish outreach movement, had flown in from Florida this week to be with the Wultz family. He described the moment during which Wultz opened his eyes to Chabad newssite Shterum.net.
“I started to put the tefillin on his hand and right before our very eyes Daniel opened his eyes and stared at us despite his comatose state. Maybe it was just a reflex, maybe not, but the fact that it happened precisely when the tefillin were placed on his hand shocked us all. Even the doctors were surprised.
“The family members who were present could not hold back their tears and were full of emotions. I cannot describe to you the electricity that flowed through the room then. It was one of the most moving and emotional experiences I ever witnessed.”
Spalter the next day again put tefillin on Wultz, who soon after opened his eyes again and for the first time began showing signs of communication to his doctors, including blinking his eyes in response to questions. But he returned to a coma yesterday.
Tefillin are leather objects with black straps containing biblical verses that are worn on the head and on one arm by Jewish men during weekday morning prayers. The verses inside the tefillin are hand-written by a scribe and consist of the four sections of the Torah in which tefillin are commanded.
One of the main commandments for wearing tefillin comes from the biblical verse in Deuteronomy: “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might. Take to heart these instructions with which I charge you this day. … Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a frontlet between your eyes.”
Tefillin have been directly connected to war and terrorism, Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Lewin, a Tel Aviv rabbi, explained to WND.
A verse in Deuteronomy states, “Then all the people of the earth shall see that the name of God is proclaimed over you and they will fear you.”
The Talmud explains the biblical verse is referring to the donning of tefillin, which contains the name of God.
In response to the verse, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the revered leader of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, promoted a tefillin campaign in Israel and around the world following the 1967 Six Day War, in which the Jewish state was attacked by several Arab countries.
“After the Six Day War the Rebbe [Schneerson] recognized the power of tefillin and its connection to war against Israel and the desire of its enemies to annihilate the Jewish state, and he started an enormous tefillin campaign,” said Lewin.
Spalter and Wultz’s family have requested people around the world pray for Daniel Wultz. Prayer sessions have been held by Chabad in Florida and by Wultz’s high-school friends. Hundreds of e-mail alerts have been sent to the Florida Jewish community and to lists worldwide asking recipients to pray for “Haim Meir Naftali, son of Sara and Yekutiel,” the Hebrew name of Daniel Wultz.

I believe that another “9/11” type of attack will occur, here in the United States, but this time with weapons of mass destruction. With our wide open borders, there really is no other conclusion to come to.

Al-Qaida has already obtained nuclear suitcase weapons from the Russian black market, weapons tested in Afghanistan in 2000, and they may have already been forward-deployed inside the U.S., according to the only journalist to interview Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri in the wake of Sept. 11.
Last week, Hamid Mir’s credibility skyrocketed when he accurately predicted in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin and later in WND the imminent release of a new recorded communiqué from bin Laden through al-Jazeera, the Arabic TV network. Two days later, bin Laden’s tape was the focus of international news coverage.
“If you think that my information and analysis about bin Laden’s location is correct,” said Hamid Mir, “then please don’t underestimate my analysis about his nuclear threat also.”
Mir said that he met with an Egyptian engineer last week who lost an eye after one of bin Laden’s nuclear tests in the Kunar province of Pakistan. The Pakistani journalist said the encounter with the engineer greatly disturbed and depressed him since it provided further assurance that a nuclear nightmare for America is about to dawn.
Mir believes that an “American Hiroshima” will occur as soon as the U.S. launches an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“Al-Qaida and Iran,” he says, “have a long, secret relationship.” “American Hiroshima” is the name al-Qaida leaders chose for their long-planned nuclear attack on the U.S.
The relationship between Iran and bin Laden dates back to June 21, 1996, when bin Laden attended a terror summit in Tehran. The gathering attracted terror leaders from various places throughout the world, including Ramadan Shallah (the Palestinian Islamic Jihad), Ahmad Salah (Egyptian Islamic Jihad), Imad al-Alami and Mustafa al-Liddawi (Hamas), Ahmad Jibril (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine), Abdallah Ocalan (the Kurdish People Party), Muhammad Ali Ahmad (al Qaida), and Imad Mugniyah (Hezbollah). The summit resulted in the creation of the “Committee of Three” that would meet on a regular basis for the “coordination, planning and execution of attacks” against the United States and Israel. The committee members were Ahmad Salah, Imad Mugniyah and bin Laden.
Mir’s position that al-Qaida’s nuclear weapons may have already been forward-deployed to the United States confirms the report of Sharif al-Masri, a key al-Qaida operative who was arrested in Pakistan in November 2000.
Al Masri, an Egyptian national with ties to al-Zawahiri, said that al-Qaida had made arrangements to smuggle nuclear weapons and supplies to Mexico. From Mexico, he said, the weapons were to be transported across the border and into the United States with the help of a Latino street gang.
Mir also maintains that numerous sleeper agents are in place in major cities throughout the United States to prepare for the nuclear holocaust. Many of these agents, he says, are Algerians and Chechens who obtained European passports and are posing as Christian and Jews.
He further says that many of these agents have been in the United States since bin Laden’s issuance of his “Declaration of War on Americans Occupying the Country of the Two Holy Places.” That fatwa was issued Aug. 23, 1996.

A popular children’s book once pondered the perils of giving a mouse a cookie.
If you give a mouse a cookie, it reasoned, he’s going to ask for a glass of milk-followed by a straw to drink it with, a mirror to check for a milk mustache, scissors to give himself a trim, and numerous other items that trap the generous giver in an endless stream of overwhelming cause and effect.
The demanding rodent seems sweet and innocent enough, but his desires become “needs,” and his “needs” soon become a long and absurd list.
The situation in American society isn’t much different, except the “mouse” has been replaced with minority fringe groups and individuals at best make up between 2 and 4 percent of the population,[1] and the “cookie” is an unending list of legislation, laws, special benefits, and demands that must be passed, granted, or met in the name of “tolerance.”
Bolstered by their perceived successes in the fight to reshape the family and other laws that attempt to provide special funding and privileges to people who engage in homosexual behavior, including “transsexuals” and “transgendered” individuals, some left-leaners have dredged up a silly old “cookie” from the feminist era and plopped it into a modern context: the push for gender neutrality.
The premise is that the usage of terms like “man,” “woman,” “boy,” “girl,” “male,” and “female” have not only outlived their usefulness, but are borderline “intolerant.” In other words, if it looks like a duck and talks like a duck, it better be a duck, or a lawsuit could find its way to your pond.
Leading the charge to strike down Joe and Jane is none other than atheist Michael Newdow, the infamous atheist who not only sought to have the word “God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance, but now wants “In God We Trust” removed from American currency.
Newdow, who claims the pledge ruling was only the beginning of his campaign to eliminate references to God in the public square, wants to replace the male and female pronouns of “he” and “she” with the gender-neutral “ree,” “rees,” and “erm” as a means of promoting “gender equity.”[2]
He’s not alone on this one.
Welcome to political correctness, circa 2006, where using the wrong gender pronoun, even in error, could have you labeled “insensitive,” “intolerant,” or even “heteronormative.”
Heteronormative? This new, ridiculously “PC” term refers to a person’s “misguided” reinforcement of the traditional gender roles of man and woman-the ones practiced by the majority of Americans. In other words, don’t assume that when someone is referring to their “date” that that person is of the opposite sex from the speaker…or that there’s even an opposite sex.
The term gained attention not long ago when it was used by the editorial board of a school newspaper at Pomona College. A staff-written Nov. 14, 2005, article urges the college to stop being “heteronormative” and install “gender neutral” bathrooms at a campus center, rather than assuming bathrooms designated for “males” and “females” alone are adequate.[3]
Actress Jada Pinkett Smith was branded “heteronormative” after delivering a speech at Harvard that focused solely on relationships and marriages between men and women. She was criticized for having a focus that was too “narrow” and which caused some in the audience to feel “left out.”[4]
On college campuses and in workplaces, a renewed push is on to eliminate bathrooms reserved solely for those subscribing to normal sexual roles. Such “stereotypes” could “alienate” those who subscribe to neither or both “roles.” Bowling Green University in Ohio has already installed such facilities. Some students and activists at other institutions, such as Beloit College and the University of Chicago, are pushing for the same.[5]
No mention is given to how much taxpayers-including those who oppose homosexual behavior-are anteing up to fund the “special” facilities, or whether they would agree with allowing their children to attend an institution that celebrates such beliefs, which may well be contrary to their own.
The moral of the lesson? If you give a mouse same-sex benefits, he’s going to ask you for the gender-neutral bathroom and oh so much more.
Alan Sears, a former federal prosecutor who held various posts in the departments of Justice and Interior during the Reagan Administration, is president and CEO of the Alliance Defense Fund (www.telladf.org), a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.

IMAGINE a Republican congressman defending traditional marriage by saying, “I am inspired in my public service by St. Paul’s admonition against sodomy in his first letter to the Corinthians.” Surely, many liberals would raise the alarm of impending theocracy. But House minority leader Nancy Pelosi–a self-described “conservative Catholic” despite her status as a pro-gay marriage, pro-choice San Francisco lefty who as a young girl thought she would rather be a priest than a nun–has lately been encouraging members of her party to couch their political arguments in Biblical terms so as to appeal to the God-fearing.
In a St. Patrick’s Day speech on the genocide in Darfur, a topic that unites religious conservatives and liberals, Pelosi said, “The gospel of Matthew is something that drives many of us in our public service.” In September of last year, she gave a speech in favor of strengthening the Endangered Species Act, in which she said, “In Isaiah in the Old Testament, we are told that to minister to the needs of God’s creation–and that includes our beautiful environment–is an act of worship.” And Pelosi, who could be speaker of the House next January, was one of 55 Catholic Democrats in the chamber who signed a “Statement of Principles” in which they expressed union with the “living Catholic tradition.” In the statement, released in February through the office of Connecticut’s Rosa DeLauro, the signers admit the “undesirability of abortion,” without actually committing to changing their party’s pro-choice agenda.
Marco Grimaldi, head of the Faith and Progressive Policy Initiative at the liberal Center for American Progress, suggests that this new tic is less a strategic move and more an act of frustration with the perception that Democrats are opposed to religion. “There is a great deal of conversation around a handful of moral issues. I think people who see things differently are really frustrated,” he said.
This statement of frustration seems to be an outgrowth of the “Faith Working Group,” an effort to coordinate discourse between House Democrats and churchgoers that Pelosi initiated just over a year ago, when the “values voters” of 2004 were still the subjects of liberal nightmares. She chose as the group’s chairman Rep. Jim Clyburn, an African Methodist Episcopalian from South Carolina’s 6th district, whom she has subsequently selected to serve as chairman of the House Democratic caucus as well. That promotion suggests the importance Pelosi places upon political fellowship with the faithful. The Faith Working Group looks mostly like a behind-the-scenes endeavor, but the “faith page” of the caucus’ website provides a glimpse into its undertakings. There, one finds a press release announcing the group’s meeting with the president of the U.S. Catholic bishops’ conference, a link to Rep. Sherrod Brown’s speech on “Faith, Holy Writ and Social Justice,” an October statement from the presiding Episcopal bishop calling the Republican budget proposal “tantamount to blasphemy,” and, of course, the Catholic “Statement of Principles.”
IN AN EARLIER DAY, American Catholics in public life sought to distance themselves from Rome. Now Catholic Democrats wish to appear as though they agree with the church even when they do not. Attempting to avoid having to reconcile this tension with the Church on abortion (and other matters), they express a desire to “speak to the fundamental issues that unite us as Catholics.” Citing the “primacy of conscience,” but ignoring the Church’s view that a good conscience is one in accord with the Church. Instead, they have created their own version of the “fundamental issues” that unite Catholics, excluding the topics on which they dissent.
Using talk of a “consistent moral framework for life,” for instance, they create the possibility of making the simple, total rejection of abortion into a complex matter of moral reasoning. Using the Church’s complex social teachings, they craft simple admonitions against war and tax cuts. This bit of political alchemy is an inversion of what Alexis de Tocqueville noticed about Catholic Americans 200 years ago. Back then, they portioned their “intellectual world” into two: “in the one [part] they place the doctrines of revealed religion, which they assent to without discussion, in the other they leave those political truths which they believe the Deity has left open to free inquiry.” Today, liberal Catholics give unquestioning allegiance to the Democratic party, while maintaining independent minds in matters of Church doctrine.
Pelosi, 66-years-old and a mother of five who did not run for office until her youngest child was nearly an adult, is certainly proud of her faith. In her speech on Darfur, she mentioned a friar in San Francisco whose work with the homeless has inspired her. She has fondly recalled her education at, and maintains relations with, Washington, D.C.’s Trinity College, formerly a Catholic institution, but which has over the years abandoned its faith, even going so far as to shut the doors of its chapel.
But Pelosi also acknowledges that Democrats must make a more concerted effort to convince devout voters that the party is not hostile to them. Catholics, who voted 51 to 48 percent in favor of a second term for President Bush, make up a sizable portion of that demographic. Additionally, liberal Catholic politicians may foresee a need to respond preemptively to critiques from prelates, such as the threats in 2004 to exclude John Kerry from Communion, or the denunciation of Pelosi’s support of abortion by the archdiocese of San Francisco in 2002.
The Faith Working Group has made strides in helping Democrats use the language of faith, but will this translate to winning religious votes? Perhaps Howard Dean has the answer.
After Tim Kaine, a religious Catholic, won the Virginia governorship following a campaign during which he frequently and proudly spoke of his faith, Dean told NPR, “We want, like Tim Kaine, to be talking about our faith, and if we’re not comfortable talking about our faith, then talk about our moral values.” Lurking in that statement, in Pelosi’s references to her “conservative Catholicism,” and in the “Statement of Principles” is a dilution of the substance of faith so that it becomes something less real, enabling a rhetoric of religion doesn’t hold politicians accountable to any tenets but their own. Behind this smokescreen, Nancy Pelosi is able to call her liberal plan to save the environment–over which, according to Genesis, God gave man dominion–an “act of worship,” but opposing abortion, which according to the Catholic church her conscience should compel her to do, is an act of intrusion.

Nancy, even Satan can quote the Bible, out of context of course, in order to try to make it support his point of view. Been taking lessions, have you? -ed.

This is a very important thing to understand. You child is allowed to express their personal beliefs, while at school, as long as the complete the assignment according to instructions.
The school cannot censor your child. If they do, and continue to do so after you have asked them to stop, please contact one of the legal institutes referred to in the article or follow one of the links from this blog or my webpage.

(AgapePress) – Recently, in a major victory for a Christian student in New York who encountered viewpoint discrimination at his public school, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a unanimous ruling by the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court found in favor of young Antonio Peck, who was censored by his Syracuse school because an art poster he drew for his kindergarten class assignment contained an image of Jesus.
Antonio Peck, who is now in the fifth grade, drew the picture as part of an assignment to design a poster about protecting the environment. The child’s work was displayed on a school cafeteria wall along with 80 other student posters during an event where parents were invited to view the students’ posters. However, the Christian kindergartener’s poster had been folded in half in order to cover the image of Jesus.
School officials explained to Antonio and his parents why his poster was folded, arguing that the child’s poster, because it included an image of Jesus, violated the separation of church and state and would give the impression that the school was teaching religion. When the school refused to remedy the situation, to apologize, or to adopt a policy that would prevent future censorship, a suit was filed by the religious freedom defense group Liberty Counsel on the Peck family’s behalf.
Attorney Mathew Staver is president and general counsel for Liberty Counsel. He says the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the earlier federal appeals court ruling sets an important precedent.
“Whenever a student responds to a class or curricular assignment,” Staver notes, “whether it’s artwork, a book report, an oral report or whatever, as long as their response is consistent with the assignment, their Christian viewpoints cannot be censored.” The high court’s decision is “a great ruling for the rights of students and their Christian viewpoints and expression around the country,” the attorney says.
By allowing the earlier court decision to stand, Staver asserts, Chief Justice Roberts’ court has signaled that the Supreme Court is no longer a place that can be used by left-wing groups like the American Civil Liberties Union to undermine the religious and moral values of Christians.
The willingness of little Antonio Peck and his family to stand and fight against censorship and viewpoint discrimination has paid off, the Liberty Counsel spokesman says. “This has been a long case,” the pro-family lawyer observes, “and I think he and his family are certainly to be congratulated for standing up and making a difference.”
The Peck family had a choice, Staver adds, “just like all of us do. They could have allowed the censorship to continue and just walked away, but that would have created bad precedent for religious expression.” But instead, he points out, the family “decided to take a stand — and stand they did.”
Although fighting the school’s actions has been a long, drawn-out process, Staver notes, the result has been the creation of great legal precedent, not only for the Pecks’ situation but for all the students and families that may face similar challenges to their religious freedom in the future.

Well, I’ve certainly not been silent about underhanded methods the homosexuals and school systems are using to advance the homosexual agenda (and I’ve caught a LOT of flak for my outspokenness), but as this article will point out, the agenda is being advanced, in our school systems, much more than most Christians realize.

(AgapePress) – Several pro-family, conservative groups are backing a new method of assessing the extent of homosexual activism at work in public schools. The “Risk Audit Project” involves a comprehensive survey to measure the promotion of homosexuality in a given public school district.
The project was developed by Linda Harvey of the Ohio-based group Mission America following last year’s approval of a Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) resolution urging parents to investigate whether their school is collaborating with homosexual activists.
Steve Crampton is chief counsel at the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy (AFA Law Center). He says far too many parents are simply unaware of the radical agenda homosexual activists are pushing on school campuses across the U.S. today.
“The overwhelming majority of Christian parents who even have gone out of their way to become involved and to try to determine what’s going on in their local schools will be surprised at how extensive the pro-homosexual agenda is in every government school in the nation,” Crampton observes.
“And I think that is reflected as well in the breadth of the pro-family groups that have come together in this project,” the pro-family attorney adds. Among the many groups endorsing the “Risk Audit,” he notes, are the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, the Illinois Family Institute, and the American Family Association.
The Risk Audit Project measures the extent to which public school districts are collaborating with homosexual activists by determining, among other things, whether schools have adopted pro-homosexual policies or curricula, and whether the school district is sponsoring pro-homosexual clubs, events, or activities. Crampton feels the risk audit is not a luxury for schools but a necessity.
“We believe that since schools are called upon and required to protect children while they’re at school, by that same token they have an absolute obligation to do no harm to the children that are under their care,” the AFA Law Center spokesman says. “And so this risk audit is an effort to first ascertain the extent of the activities in our schools and, second, to let the American public know what’s really going on.”
The AFA Center for Law & Policy has joined the other pro-family groups in endorsing the Risk Audit Project. This coalition is urging parents and other concerned citizens to look into whether homosexual indoctrination is going on in their school systems as a preliminary step in combating the problem.

Whereas I feel disassociation of a church member is a very extreme measure, the pastor is actually following the instructions from Jesus to His disciples in Matthew 18:15-17.
Now with that said, my approach would have been different. I would have made sure that every sermon the lady was present for, would have had a message about adulterers and unrepentant sin. While delivering this message, I would be looking directly at her. That way, she can continue to hear the Word of God and maybe realize that what she is doing is not right.
Some might say “Well maybe she was in an abusive marriage of something”. That could be true. The news story does say “Westlake had approached Penley about her inappropriate relationship with another man as well as her decision to terminate her marriage without any biblical basis.”
Because it says “without any biblical basis”, this leads me to believe that she just didn’t want to be married to the same guy anymore, not that she was being abused. It is Biblically correct to be divorced from an abusive spouse.
But back to the article, it will be a very bad day for the church if the courts rule that they have jurisdiction in internal church policy.

(AgapePress) – The Texas Supreme Court has announced it will hear a case that could determine whether courts have the authority to interfere with matters such as church discipline.
The case known as Penley v. Westbrook dates back nearly six years to when Buddy Westbrook, pastor of Crossland Community Bible Church of Fort Worth, Texas, disassociated female church member Peggy Penley over divorce and adultery. Pastor Westbrook was sued after sending a letter to church members informing them of the situation.
Hiram Sasser is with Liberty Legal Institute, which is representing the church in the matter. He maintains that the U.S. Constitution protects churches and pastors when it comes to internal matters such as church discipline, and he says this case is “extremely important,” in that it deals with this fundamental First Amendment issue.
According to Sasser, Pastor Westbrook followed the three-step model for conflict resolution outlined in Matthew, Chapter 18, and was left with no other choice but disassociation after Penley refused to repent of her sin.
The attorney says Westlake had approached Penley about her inappropriate relationship with another man as well as her decision to terminate her marriage without any biblical basis. It was only after these efforts failed and Penley refused to repent that Crossland Community Bible Church’s pastor wrote the letter to congregation members outlining the reasons for Penley’s removal.
Increasingly over recent years, Sasser notes, a pattern has existed “of new lawsuits against pastors for following biblical principles and following the Bible.” One of Liberty Legal Institute’s goals in this case, he points out, is “to make sure that we establish clear precedent that pastors are immune from suit under the Constitution of the United States.”
Now the Texas Supreme Court will hear the case, one that the Liberty Legal Institute spokesman believes could have a major impact in the future on whether courts have the authority to meddle or intervene in internal church matters, particularly with regard to church membership, governance, and other similar issues.
“This case, perhaps, could forever settle this new trend of suing pastors for engaging in church discipline and following biblical principles,” Sasser contends. He says the U.S. Constitution protects the right of a church to choose its members and govern itself “in any manner it chooses according to doctrine and faith, without government interference.”
Likewise, Sasser asserts, pastors have a constitutional right to inform their congregations of “the influence of sin on church members and the steps being taken to address such sin.” He says the U.S. Constitution prohibits individuals from suing churches or pastors for simply following biblical mandates that require disassociation from unrepentant members.

04.27.06

WASHINGTON – Authorities have captured the largest number of sex offenders ever nabbed in a single law enforcement effort, federal officials will announce Thursday.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and John F. Clark, director of the United States Marshals Service, will detail the results of Operation Falcon II, a seven-day nationwide fugitive roundup, during a press conference in Washington at 1:15 p.m. EDT. Among those arrested during Operation Falcon II were 1,102 violent sexual offenders. The operation was conducted from April 17 through April 23.
The “priority targets” arrested were fugitives wanted for committing sexual offenses and crimes of violence against women, children and the elderly, as well as unregistered convicted sex offenders, according to Justice Department officials.
Others arrested in Operation Falcon II were fugitive gang members and violent offenders wanted for homicide, kidnapping, robbery, burglary, carjacking, weapons offenses, and narcotics sales.
FOX News’ Mike Levine contributed to this report.

Hundreds of people were injured and the offices of a fringe university newspaper, the “Insurgent”, a publication at the University of Oregon, were burned as dissident Christians rioted over cartoons published in the newspaper. Several of the offending cartoons showed Jesus in an offensive manner. Cars were burned as rioters shouted “Death to Newspapers” and “Death to the South European Barn Swallow”. Reporters are not quite sure why the South European Barn Swallow was singled out, other than one rioter thought his cousin’s friend might have said that one may have recently worked at the “Insurgent” as a typesetter.
Oh wait, this didn’t actually happen…
I mean, yes, the “Insurgent”, a fringe newspaper at the University of Oregon, did print some very offensive cartoons of Jesus, in an convoluted attempt to draw some kind of connection between the Danish cartoons of mohammed and the freedom to print and say whatever they were trying to print and say. But as for the rioting Christians? The only place that happened was in my imagination.
Here’s the article:

A Catholic activist organization has written to Oregon’s governor and state lawmakers to protest a University of Oregon student newspaper for having published cartoons showing Jesus Christ naked and with an erection.
In its March edition, the Insurgent, an “alternative” student paper on the Eugene, Ore., campus printed 12 hand-drawn cartoons of Jesus as a response to rival paper the Commentator having published the controversial cartoons of Muhammad originally published in Europe that sparked Muslim riots worldwide. The Insurgent claimed it published the drawings to “provoke dialogue.”
William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said the university’s president, Dave Frohnmayer, had been unresponsive to complaints about the drawings, so he had written to the governor, every state legislators and the chancellor of the Oregon University System, among others.
“The March edition of the Insurgent … was one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity I have ever seen,” Donohue said in a statement. “To make sure that the persons I wrote to understand how vile this attack was, I sent a photocopy of the two most offensive graphics: one was a depiction of a naked Jesus on the cross with an erection; the other, titled ‘Resurrection,’ showed a naked Jesus kissing another naked man, both sporting erections.”
Donohue also says there were other depictions of Jesus on the cross that were “so gratuitously offensive that only the most depraved would defend them.” He also noted the paper published two commentaries attacking Catholicism.
“That all of this appeared in a student newspaper, during Lent, on the campus of a state institution, makes one wonder what is going on at the University of Oregon,” added Donohue.
While not describing the more sexual drawings, the main student newspaper at the university, the Oregon Daily Emerald, also criticized the Insurgent.
“The Insurgent editorial indicates a desire to show Americans why the original cartoons were so offensive to the Muslim world,” wrote the editor of the Emerald. “According to the editorial, ‘What is “not a big deal” in the US (sic) is apparently a humongous big deal to others. Why should we assume it would not be?’
“However, printing home-grown cartoons depicting Jesus on a cross/pogo stick or Jesus on a cross/hangliding apparatus are not inflammatory in the same manner as the anti-Islam cartoons, and therefore fail to produce the intended empathy from Christians to Muslims.”
Added the paper: “Unlike the Danish cartoons, the Insurgent drawings seem intended to simply incite controversy for controversy’s sake rather than making specific social commentaries.”
A spokesman for Frohnmayer contacted WorldNetDaily after press time to say that the university president had posted a statement regarding the controversy surrounding the cartoons:
“I share your concern about the offensive nature of the content contained within the publication.
“I understand why it may seem as if the University should have prevented publication or should take some action against those responsible for the publication. The Student Insurgent is not owned, controlled or published by the University of Oregon and is funded with student fees. Therefore, the University cannot exercise editorial control over its content.
“The best response to offensive speech often is more speech. … I am strongly opposed to speech that makes individuals feel that they or their beliefs are unwelcome or belittled, and I can assure you I will use all permissible means to respond to publications such as the recent Insurgent.”

I came into possession of this bank note several years ago, but don’t know anything about it. Since the blogshere possesses the most intelligent and learned people in the world, I thought I would throw it out there and see if anyone can read it and tell me where it’s from. Thanks!

(AgapePress) – As part of an effort to settle a discrimination lawsuit, a Dallas-area public school district has decided to stop discriminating against a student-led Christian club. The district’s move comes after the student group filed suit, asking a federal judge to tell school officials to stop discriminating against the Christian students’ religious club.
Earlier this year, a group of students at a middle school in the Plano Independent School District (PISD) asked administrators for permission to form a Christian club. The club, named SWAT or Students Witnessing Absolute Truth, was approved.
Eventually, however, school officials told the students their group could not receive official recognition or a staff sponsor because it is a religious club. Liberty Legal Institute, a Dallas-area based religious freedom defense group, filed suit on behalf of the members of SWAT after a description of their club was briefly removed from a listing of non-curricular clubs on the PISD website.
Seventh-grader Michael Shell, the Christian club’s founder, says he and his fellow members only want to be treated fairly. If he and the other Christian students on campus simply let school officials “throw us around,” he observes, “then they would get the idea that Christians are weak and they can’t do anything, and [that] this Jesus guy they talk about isn’t really important to them.”
Liberty Legal Institute attorney Hiram Sasser says the school has harmed the club by not allowing it to have a faculty or staff sponsor. Denial of adult sponsorship meant the student group could not have a bank account — a fact that created problems for the Christian club, particularly during its fundraising efforts.
“Here’s some kids that are engaged in a fundraiser now, trying to raise money for multiple sclerosis, to help battle that disease,” Sasser posits. “While all the other clubs get to have a school bank account, these kids just have to kind of run around with the money in their pocket in order to give it to the multiple sclerosis folks.”
The types of institutional impediments PISD officials were throwing in front of this Bible club were “just absolutely ludicrous,” the Liberty Legal attorney contends. And this kind of discrimination is not new to this district, Sasser notes, as the Plano school system has been sued in the past for refusing students permission to hand out religious-themed candy canes during the Christmas season.
PISD School Board trustees voted last Monday to respond to SWAT’s lawsuit by voting to offer the Christian group the same privileges extended to other student clubs as part of a formal settlement proposal, which offer also includes an award of $100 in damages to the Bible study group and its founder. The district would also agree to pay legal costs in the case but would admit no wrongdoing.

It’s getting harder and harder these days to find television programs that are suitable for children. Aside from the filth the “big four” networks are producing these days, it seems that almost every other network has started showing:
1. Sexual suggestive content with teens as the characters.
2. Disfunctional families without dads or with dads whose only purpose is comic relief.
3. Commercials for lifestyle enhancement drugs.
4. Reality shows that, for the most part, aren’t reality at all.
5. The use of religious terms and language as swear words.
These are just some of the things that come to mind. The bottom line is that the networks will continue to spew trash until they are hit in their bottom line. They only understand the loss of revenue. Continue to “vote” your morals with your dollars and make sure they (the networks and advertisers) know are doing it.

(AgapePress) – Family-friendly media watchdogs say the television industry is merely trying to dodge its responsibility to police itself and its content. And the head of the FCC says the multi-million-dollar ad campaign just announced by the industry won’t be enough to satisfy his agency’s mandate to patrol the airwaves for indecency.
At their annual convention on Monday, the National Association of Broadcasters heard a pitch from the former head of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) about an upcoming ad campaign designed to inform parents about V-chip technology and television program ratings. “We want to tell parents that they, and they alone, have total power to control every hour of television programming,” said Jack Valenti in announcing the $330 million ad campaign.
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has his own translation of Valenti’s statement. The “avalanche” of ads, he says, is designed to persuade parents it is their sole responsibility to monitor what their children watch on TV. “In other words,” says the FRC president, “the MPAA wants to continue to pump out the sewage and make you [parents] responsible for the cleanup.”
“How noble. How empowering for you,” Perkins says tongue-in-cheek. “And how ridiculous.”
The announced ad campaign comes in the wake of a $3.6 million fine recently proposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against CBS for what the agency determined to be indecent programming, and the FCC’s decision to uphold another half-million-dollar fine against the network for the infamous “wardrobe malfunction” debacle during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. At the same time, the federal agency cited several TV programs — but did not fine the originating networks — for violating the standards for broadcasting indecent language. (See earlier article)
Since the FCC’s announcement in mid-March, the four major networks — ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox — have sued the FCC over the indecency rulings. The networks claim the FCC “overstepped its authority” in making rulings that are “unconstitutional and inconsistent with … previous FCC decisions.”
Some media watchdogs claim that lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt by the networks to obtain the right to indiscriminately broadcast foul language in violation of current law. One of those who feels that way is L. Brent Bozell of the Parents Television Council (PTC) — and he has a similar response to the ad campaign being promoted by Valenti and the MPAA. Bozell says his group’s research has shown that the V-chip and the ratings system — the core elements promoted by the ad campaign — have failed.
“We have found that most television programs airing foul language, violence, and inappropriate sexual dialogue do not use the appropriate descriptors that would warn parents about the presence of offensive content,” the PTC president notes. “Without accurate descriptors, the V-chip fails — and thus, the ratings system is rendered meaningless.”
According to Bozell, the only solution is for the industry to “clean up its act,” rather than to try to make the public more aware of technology and ratings that have been proven to be ineffective. The ad campaign, he asserts, will not solve the problem.
“They’re spending $300 million to defend themselves against their wretched excesses,” he says. “Why don’t they just stop airing their wretched excess?”
Someone else agrees with Bozell’s assessment of the multi-million-dollar advertising blitz — and that someone is Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. “I’m not sure that’s the complete answer,” Martin said of the campaign Tuesday in Las Vegas. He noted that live sports programming, such as the Super Bowl, is among the type of programs not rated.
In addition, Reuters reports, Martin observed that his agency’s research indicates that upwards of 40 percent of the TV sets in the U.S. do not have V-chips or other blocking technology. He believes that other initiatives — such as family-tier options or “a la carte” offerings by cable companies — would give consumers more choice. Consequently, parents would have more control over what they allow into their homes.

04.26.06

OK, I’m going to take a moment to dispel some of the false information that is going on out there concerning why gas prices are so high. I’m not going to post a bunch of figures to back this up with right now because I’m very busy, but if quite a few people demand it, I will nail the figures down and add them later.
Here we go.

The reason that gas prices are up is because of the United State’s dependence of foreign oil.
Why are we dependent on foreign oil?
Because we refuse to do any significant drilling domestically and refuse to build new oil refineries.
Why do we refuse to do these things that would help us have enough gas to meet demand?
Because the politicians are afraid of stressing owls, foxes and caribou.
The environmental laws of this country make it virtually impossible to drill or add refinery capacity. In short, we have done this to ourselves.

I keep seeing headlines like “Bush Announces Gas Price Investigation” and “Democrats Quick to Jump on Bush for High Gas Prices”. This type of rot really gets my blood pressure up. All this is political hogwash and finger pointing.
We, the self-absorbed American public are to blame.

And Guess What?
It’s too late to do anything about it.
That’s right. Even if we started drilling and building today, it would take almost 2 years or more for it to even begin to make a difference.

Before you blame one party or the other, take a moment to check the voting record of your congressperson and senator. How did they vote on domestic drilling issues and environmental issues? Might be an eye opener.

If you can’t take the time to check out the facts, by the way, then you deserve to be paying at least $3.00 per gallon for gas.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “illegal” as: “not according to or authorized by law”. It goes on to define “alien” as: “relating, belonging, or owing allegiance to another country or government”.
Exactly how is it racist to use the correct terminology to describe someone’s immigration status. It’s amazing how far a liberal is willing to distort things in order to play the race card.

Appearing on KLIF Radio’s Gregg Knapp show, attorney Domingo Garcia said that using the terms illegal alien or illegal immigrant is a “racial slur”. Garcia said that those who use it, in reference to Hispanics, are racist.
Knapp advised Garcia that using the term “illegal aliens” or “illegal immigrants” is an accurate term applied to [their] legal vs. illegal status in the country and a true depiction of the fact that they are illegal. Garcia said: “Using words like illegal alien is like calling people derogatory names…like calling people nigger!”